Strange how the actors who were for Buffy's ending, are now, only a year on, missing it. First Sarah Michelle Gellar, whose answer to the "Will you do a movie?" question is now no longer a quick "no". Now Emma Caulfield, who I seem to remember saying that she was done with the Buffyverse, season 7 was to be her last even if there was to be an 8th, she also said she'd never come back. Now she's musing on how Joss would bring Anya back should there be a movie.

Also, any talk of a Buffy movie is good, it'd be cool if the upcoming Angel TV movies could lay the groundwork and storylines for a big screen movie.

Ghost Spike | April 26, 14:05 CET

Who here can see the comment Emma made about the "politics" on the show being very quickly turned into "Sarah was a total bitch!".

Honestly, i have seen less pointed comments used to spur the Let's All Hate SMG Now Campaign. If there is one thing you can be sure of it is that someone, somewhere will be rubbing there hands together at the chance to turn yet another quote from a former Buffy star into undeniable evidence that Sarah is satan.

And the sad thing is that the backlash has already started against David because he didn't offer to sign a life long contract and play Angel until hell freezes over in order to save the show.

The nerve of both Sarah and David, thinking there is life outside of Buffy and Angel for them!

That was sarcasm by the way!

Kaine | April 26, 14:25 CET

I got the impression it was more to do with the lack of development of her character in season 7. After 'Selfless' there was very little plot for Anya until she got killed off.

Simon | April 26, 14:36 CET

I agree with Simon. I felt she was talking about lack of character development too, as does Michelle Trachtenberg. The regulars, apart from Buffy and Spike did seem to get side-lined a lot in favour of guest stars in the last season.

brob1 | April 26, 14:39 CET

Joss himself has also referred to her having a "rough time" just because of politics on the set. But when I heard that, I didn't think about it being anything with the other actors. I thought it was really more just about problems with the people making the show?

Also, not that I don't like Emma, but I did always get the feelings from her interviews that she is kind of a biting, take-no-prisoners kind of person, maybe...?

mchan | April 26, 14:51 CET

Well nice to see that at least three people can read the comment for what it actually meant rather than what the endlessly rehashed threads in various forums will turn it into. Kinda promising that the first replies to my post weren't from SMG bashers.

I can see it now though ... "Sarah forced the writers to ignore my character says irate former Buffy star".

It will happen. Always does.

Kaine | April 26, 14:59 CET

SMG didn't even come into my head when I read the comment. I thought the same as Simon and brob1. I understood SMG's decision to move on from Buffy and I understand why DB feels the way he does too. But that won't stop me from hoping that we will see a BtVS/AtS movie in the future. One that involves all of the cast.

cal | April 26, 15:12 CET

I thought I read somewhere about her having problems with negotiation of her contracts with FOX, so that's what came to mind when I read the "politics" comment. Can't remember exactly, but something to do with not getting a good enough deal, IIRC.

StarFaith | April 26, 15:26 CET

My god!!! Don't tell me that after all this time of being a Buffy and Angel fan i have finally discovered an enlightened posting board where it's users are actually able to think about what they read and give a rational opinion rather than immediately assume the worst of the people who have entertained them so well over the years.

This is just so refreshing, lol.

Kaine | April 26, 15:34 CET

Technopagan, I agree with you entirely. It is refreshing to see that a very ambiguous comment is not immediately taken to prove some obscure theory that one particular person was a "monster" who made the lives of everyone else a living hell (a group of people who, let's face it, were surely able to stick up for themselves.)

It would probably be better if these ambiguous comments were not made in the first place. A lot can be learned from SMG, who always seems to be very gracious about the people she works with whenever she is asked questions in interviews.

The bottom line is that these people made a wonderful show that we are all very grateful for. Who cares about the "politics"? It's called life, and quite frankly it's none of our business.

[ edited by dashboardprophet on 2004-04-26 14:46 ]

alien lanes | April 26, 16:40 CET

I agree with Cal, Simon & brob1. I didn't think the comment was aimed at SMG, I took the comment to be about the business end of working there.

I do business with many large companies that are surprising disorganized, they can be very fustrating to work with. As a contactor it is very hard to schedule your time and book work when the people you work with don't know how much they need you, and can't tell you what times they need you. I imagine actors/actresses experience the same.

Passion | April 26, 16:53 CET

"There were just certain politics around there that made it very difficult to grow."

This sounds a little on the frustrated side, but that she simply has a matter-of-fact "Oh, well, what are you gonna do?" attitude. I'm sure she's been in the business long enough to accept that actors don't have much power unless they have some kind of production deal. She just had something to say in a satirical way and it's unfortunate if some people are going to take it the wrong way.

technopagan--"...I have finally discovered an enlightened posting board where its users are actually able to think about what they read give a rational opinion rather than immediately assume the worst of the people who have entertained them so well over the years."

That is exactly why I decided to become a member of Whedonesque after lurking for about a year. I'm fairly new to all this, but I found the selfish and immature sense of entitlement some posters at other boards had quite distressing. I sometimes wondered how they functioned in life when things weren't going their way.

And while I sometimes get that Marx Brothers/ Annie Hall feeling about being wary of any club that would have someone like me as a member, I do feel priveledged to be allowed to comment here.

bloodflowers | April 26, 17:23 CET

I think the fact that she pointed out it had nothing to do with Joss Whedon, yet refered to it as politics hints to what you've all been saying. If it was slyly directed at a cast member, she wouldn't have mentioned Joss. I reckon it's got to do with business, and/or perhaps some people didn't really want any more Anya after "Selfless" (whether it be the execs or the other writers). And yeah, Whedonesque rocks! : )

kaivaal | April 26, 17:27 CET

I don't want to bash the SMG-basher bashing people, but to immediately say that some people will try and turn this comment into a remark about SMG, without anyone having done that (yet) is just as much saying things about someone without any tangible occasion.

Personally, the idea did not even cross my mind that someone might interpret it as an anti-SMG remark.

Anyway I hope her film will be released in Europe as well.

Celebithil | April 26, 17:45 CET

Uh...nobody go crazy--but I gotta admit, when I heard politics--I thought SMG. I did...it just popped into view. And I think it only did because I have a long history with actors and production crews and...well, it can happen. I mean, I didn't wax on in my head or anything but there is something that has been bothering me for years and it's there in my mental library subtexting everything.

It's something JM has said in a jokey way about her when he would discuss their different acting process.

He's mentioned time and again, that SMG would always be chatting and chitting on right up before they called 'action' even before a difficult scene and he always made it seem like a compliment like how she could just swing into it and he, being a method actor would need to stay in his space.

He always makes it sound like how he had to learn to play ball in a new game with actors different from theatre people.

And maybe he only says it outloud like that as a passive aggressive way to criticise her under the guise of a compliment. Our JM is not beyond being politic.

But still, the evidence is in. She was not supportive. No way.

Nude scenes are always tough and support from your fellow actors is usually a given but SMG would 'mock the sock' he had to wear when he did any nude scene. Now he always tells these stories and people laugh but if an actor friend was telling me tales like this over coffee--I'd definately be asking a question or two about intention.

There is not an actor I know that doesn't respect process...because sooner or later you are all in that space and the golden rule is a good one.

And the ones that don't. Baby, you gotta watch your back with them lemme tell you.

So when you mock someone that says you don't respect them (I have video tape from 2003 Flashback weekend if somone needs a direct quote--she would make fun of him saying something like: "oooh I'm a tree, I'm a tree..." which ridicules a method actor's sense of 'being in the moment.')

If an actor did that to me before a scene where I was to cry or do something intense I would think they where either 1) stupid and so self absorbed as to be clueless. or 2. Sabotage.

Either way--not good. I think from the way she prattles on in tv interviews--she might just see herself at the center and so is more than a little clueless about how to respect another actor's process. Which for an actor is their life's blood.

I often wondered how Sarah and Freddie would get along on the set and that would be a tale.

Bottom line. No actor enjoys working with another actor who doesn't respect individual process. So yeah, I guess I'm always looking for evidence of her behaving the same way with other people. Doesn't make her evil--just immature. If it's true--life will teach her eventually. People are complex and have good and negative aspects and all from a subjective point of view--the truth isn't bad. It's only when one focuses on one particular aspect and ignores other information that would bring the whole picture into balance that puts us in danger of becoming crazy.

I could so easily see her at the end of seven, excited, talking about projects to come and so at the center of her world she was oblivious at the reaction this would have to people soon to be out of work.

She's excited about the future and loves to chat about it--from another persons point of view--she's bragging.

See what I mean? The first stage of being an actor is the need to be at the center of the world...as the gift develops it becomes the need to be of service using the gift to communicate. I can very easily see her at the beginning of her craft. Different aspects of these rumors may be true but always, always should be woven into a bigger picture of personality development.

And if Emma is talking about this actor personality type in Bandwagon--boy I'm gonna love watching that.

O.K. (sigh) Now flame me.

BforBeth | April 26, 18:16 CET

"I don't want to bash the SMG-basher bashing people..."

Because if you did, there would then be the people who bash the people who bash the SMG-basher bashing people.

prufrock | April 26, 18:20 CET

Um, anybody interested in the movie much?

I am! It sounds fabulous!

Chris in Virginia | April 26, 18:23 CET

Yes, thank you, Chris in Virginia. I am. I think it sounds great. She is so much fun to watch portraying a character who takes herself way too seriously and I think watching a whole movie of that is going to be hilarious.

[ edited by stakeholder on 2004-04-26 16:43 ]

marmoset | April 26, 18:42 CET

Isa, you make some very interesting points. I enjoyed reading what you wrote because it was a new perspective I hadn't personally come across before. I'm not sure I agree with you entirely, but I don't know anywhere near enough about the acting process you contradict your basic argument.

And Chris in Virginia and stakeholder, I'm really hoping I can get to see the film, if it makes it over here to the UK. It sounds like great fun.

alien lanes | April 26, 19:00 CET

Isa - "O.K. (sigh) Now flame me"

See, a far as i'm concerned at least, what you have just written is a well thought out opinion from somebody who can actually give valid insight, not some brainless comment from a Buffy fan that really wanted season eight to happen.

Sarah isn't perfect, i don't believe she is and i doubt anyone here would say she was. What you said is probably true, certainly for the occasion you described. However she is also far from the superbitch other people believe her to be.

So no flaming from me okay!

Celebithil - "I don't want to bash the SMG-basher bashing people, but to immediately say that some people will try and turn this comment into a remark about SMG, without anyone having done that (yet) is just as much saying things about someone without any tangible occasion."

True enough, but believe me i am speaking from the experience of many a Buffy/Angel forum, there does exist a minority of the fanbase who will post absolutely anything to try turn people against Sarah, or more recently David.

I don't see that my comment equals the same thing however. My opinion that somebody will twist Emma's words isn't directed at any specific person and will in no way be harmful to anyone's reputation whereas every time one of said people attack Sarah they are directing it at her and trying to influence others to dislike her at the same time.

Big difference as far as i am concerned.

Kaine | April 26, 19:16 CET

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet - that is an extremely sexy picture of Caulfield in the TV Guide link.

prufrock | April 26, 19:25 CET

hmm, i dont think it was about any particular person either. and i agree with technopagan, i dont think anybody here thinks SMG was absolutely perfect.....although i feel about this "sock mock" thing that maybe it was, its so hard to say this, a joke. we werent there so we will never know. it sounds like a joke just to keep things light on the set, and i dont see how that should be considered immature and what not. but oh well, i agree that Emmas character didnt get any growth in the last season so that would bother me a little as well.

norman | April 26, 19:29 CET

What made me smile was how positive Emma sounded about the possibility of a reunion movie; not whether it would be made, not whether she'd have to think about reprising Anya; just how would joss bring her back? I felt an actual glimmer of optimism: perhaps these movies will materialize after all. and good for her. if there were any problems on the set, she's obviously moved on from them.

oh and hello - "long time lurker, first time poster"

nyangel | April 26, 19:34 CET

Truthfully went I read the comment - I took it to mean litterally "Politics" - Emma is a die hard republican and is a very vocal one at that and most of the other cast members are democrats - you know oil and water when it comes to that subject. Even James Marsters has said he has had a heated debate or two over political views with Emma.

Speaking of movie Nick this past weekend also seemed to think a movie maybe an eventuallity but it may not be on TV, he also mentioned a few other things of note:

1. Alyson, Tony,and himself rescently did some voice work for Joss on an animated series presentaion - he didn't elaborate any more than that though.

2. Joss may be working on creating a new series but he didn't have any details on it but it sounded as if it is in early development.

On the Ripper front Anthony seemed to think Joss is still goingto do a 2 hour movie - cause everytime he speaks with Joss, he tells him even more about the script ideas he's had andwhat he plans on doing and Tony is excited and cannot wait to get started.

RavenU | April 26, 19:58 CET

Okay, I'm one who usually defends SMG from bashers but I think, Technopagan, when you have a post that comments on people bashing SMG given any opportunity (which is normally true for some) but it hasn't happened in the post yet is kind of inviting them to become defensive and give their reasons for not liking her and therefore, more bashing.

I personally don't understand the need to make negative comments about someone you personally don't know or to go out of your way to read something negative into someone elses perfectly innocent comments and to over analyze everything someone says in an interview. I have heard James Marsters comment many a time about his method acting and how it is hard for other actors (notice the plural there so he wasn't just speaking about a specific person) to work with him because of it. He doesn't strike me as someone who would go out and say things with mixed meanings to them so I think if he compliments someone then it is a compliment. He has also commented many times that SMG and he are very good friends and that he was closest to her on the set. The fact that he is going around retelling this story about the sock is an indication to me that he thought it was funny and enjoyed the teasing. If someone cracked a joke at my expense that I was sensitive about I doubt I'd go around telling everyone about it and putting myself back in that situation. And that is not unusual for actors and actresses to make jokes during sex scenes because it is an uncomfortable situation and many actors and actresses in interviews have said how they've joked about it to lessen the tension.

My take on the comment is it was more a comment on the politics of the business and the contract talks. Her character was not a lead character and there wasn't going to be much they could do with her past a certain point. Amber Benson also had problems behind the scenes that had nothing to do with the other actors or actresses but a disagreement moneywise and where they wanted to go with her character. It is a business to these people and it is their jobs. Emma had been making many comments throughout the entire final season that she did not want to come back and wanted to try new things which is an indication to me that she had felt before the season even started that it was time to move on. Yes, the final season did revolve around the potentials too much but the season before was very much about Willow's struggle with magic and Xander's relationship with Anya.

And I don't think it's unusual for either Emma or SMG to now want to revisit the roles. Time makes the heart grow fonder and having a break from something can make you realize how much you miss it. I know I've left jobs before that I couldn't wait to leave and in hindsight wished I could go back. That's just life.

And I also think with both actresses sounding excited about a possible movie, they'll bring that more energy to it. I also think the possibility of a movie is sounding more and more realistic with all these comments coming from former castmates and media. If it was all strictly a rumor we really wouldn't be hearing any of them comment on it.

Firefly Flanatic | April 26, 20:13 CET

Is it possible that the "politics" comment was more about the fact that Emma was pretty much the only Republican on the set? It kinda seemed, in past interviews, that it was a pretty big deal for her.

ringworm | April 26, 20:24 CET

Yes, it could be what she was talking about. My mom is a Republican whereas the majority of her family isn't and she is quite vocal in trying to convert the rest of us which leads to some heated discussions. As someone else mentioned earlier it seemed she had quite heated discussions with James. I can imagine it would be very uncomfortable if just about everyone else you worked with had a totally different outlook when it came to our country's politics and it could've made her feel like an outsider. Especially if other people were having open discussions and complaining about the way things are and she always felt the need to defend her views.

Firefly Flanatic | April 26, 20:31 CET

I agree with ringworm and blwessels.

I've read at least 2 interviews with Emma where she has stated that the reason she wanted to leave BtVS was entirely monetary. She has said, (and I quote loosely), " As far as growing as an actor, Buffy was a great place to be, but monetarily, it was pretty limited."

So I think her major motivation to leave wasn't based on any bad feelings. Sounds to me like it was just cash. She wanted the opportunity to make more money.

Hope her movie does well, but I'd love to see her as Anya again, glad to know she's up for it.

Willowy | April 26, 21:14 CET

Thank you blwessels, for saying exactly what I was thinking. You just saved me 10 minutes of typing! I find it strange that anyone would take JM's comments and try to twist them into something negative and passive agressive. Everyone has a different boiling point on the Offense-O-Meter -- something that one person might find offensive may be taken very lightly by someone else. I know that for me personally, it takes quite a bit to get under my skin. I think it's obvious that JM's comments regarding SMG were meant to be lighthearted. The two of them really seemed to get along, and it's a waste of time to overanalyze comments in an attempt to prove otherwise.

As for the article itself, I'm getting more excited about Emma's movie the more that I hear about it. I hope that it finds some sort of distribution, or else I may end up shelling out 50 bucks to buy it online like I did for Chance. I'm sure it'd be worth it though.

MindPieces | April 26, 21:29 CET

I saw the comment, I thought SMG. But then again, the big three killed my baby, I shot J.R., and ... uh... some other pop cultural reference so I sound clever.

In any case, I have no hostility to Sarah Michelle Gellar. I don't know her. She's an actress in a television program I enjoy/obsess about more than I should. It kind of ends there.

TheJoyofZeppo | April 26, 21:33 CET

Re the method acting comments, I have read several different comments from different actors on the show, regulars and guest stars, saying how supportive and helpful SMG was. The guy who played the ghost who shot the teacher he was in love with, a scene that she had to replay 'possesed' by his spirit, talked recently about how she asked him how he wanted to play the scene and she'd then copy him. He was amazed that the star of the show would ask the opinion of an unknown, one time, guest star.

I would think that considering the long stressful hours the actors put in on the show a happy atmosphere with laughing and joking can only help.

zz9 | April 26, 21:35 CET

blwessels...i agree with everything you said up there. As I usually do. I find that I am nodding yes and agreeing with your posts as I read them all the time. I thought we were so much alike...defending SMG, watching with our daughters, the Lindsay Wagner thing...etc...but (*shock*) you're a democrat??? LOL...well at least we have the Jossverse!!! LOL.....(oh and people...I'm just joking...don't bash me...republican here...but a Buffy/Angel loving republican...yep it's true...they do exist!!! ;)

Coll | April 26, 21:37 CET

It always surprises me that a show that is so fiercly liberal can still attract conservative viewers.

ringworm | April 26, 21:42 CET

I never saw the show as having an overtly political leaning but you can read a lot into it. For instance, when I first watched Buffy's speech at the end of 'Bring On The Night' I thought it was a metaphor for America foreign policy post 9/11.

Simon | April 26, 21:50 CET

"Fiercly liberal"?

I don't see that at all, ringworm.

Fiercely moral, maybe, but I don't think the two are of necessity synonymous.

You mean the lesbian stuff, the Wicca, the sex?

Hey, in the Buffyverse, sex is very serious and has tremendous consequences. There are prices to be paid for one's actions. And, (although this is from Angel), "You never run out of chances to atone...you just have to take them."

"Fiercely liberal"? Not seeing that at all.

/by the way, conservative Republican here. As is my wife, who is even more wild about Buffy than I am.

Chris in Virginia | April 26, 21:54 CET

I dunno, maybe it's because Joss is so vocal about his political and religious beliefs. I mean feminism, treating homosexuals as normal people, questioning authority, these have all been very liberal pursuits.

ringworm | April 26, 21:58 CET

Yes, Coll, I am a Democrat!!

Now as for Buffy (or Angel for the matter) being "Fiercly liberal" I don't agree. I think it's just great story telling! I think it appeals to all types of people (as we can see by the varied responses to any thread that is posted on this website. I think there are things that are associated to being a democrat and things that are associated to being a republican that are more realistically things that everyone feels. There are many Gay republicans and republicans who are atheists as there are many democrats who don't agree with Gay marriage and are very religious. Barbara Bush is a republican who believes in a woman's right to choose and her husband and son obviously are not. And also the fact that Joss' shows have audiences all over the world is also a major indication that he is a master story teller that can draw all sorts of people in.

That's what I love about the Jossverse - it speaks to so many of us and so many of us can relate regardless of gender, sexual orientation, political beliefs and religious beliefs and even nationality.

Firefly Flanatic | April 26, 22:23 CET

I think "fiercely liberal" is dead on accurate. The 'verse has a definite anti-right wing, anti-establishment bias: this is where powerful women are in control of their destinies; where high school kids eat the principal; where parents are reduced to figureheads; homosexuals are heroes; there's no prayer anywhere and hardly anyone cares that they have a constitutional right to carry guns. in fact almost every plank in the conservative platform is blithely ignored. and i'm not sure that this does not at least partially explain the tenuous position of both shows on the network, despite their obvious quality and entertainment value.

nyangel | April 26, 22:47 CET

I wouldn't call the show extremely liberal, but there have been some hints that the writers on both Buffy and Angel are not fans of George W. Bush. For example, when Cordelia recovered from her amnesia in Season 4 of "Angel", she said she wished she didn't remember who was president. I vaguely remember a similar scene in Buffy's season 7. Also, during the whole Dixie Chicks bashing phase last year, Fred puts up a Dixie Chicks poster in her lab. The show, in general, I think does not promote any particular political party. It is well known, however, that Joss and most of his staff are not affiliated with the Republican party.

mai | April 26, 22:54 CET

Nicely put, blwessels.

nyangel--"where high school kids eat the principal; parents are reduced to figureheads...no prayer anywhere..." These are examples of liberalism?

Not getting it at all.

Chris in Virginia | April 26, 22:55 CET

Re...James comments on Sarah there is a poster on another board (who is no fan of SMG) who met James and confirmed that the comments they had heard James make about SMG were said in a lighthearted and Jokey manner

[ edited by garda39 on 2004-04-26 21:14 ]

garda39 | April 26, 23:13 CET

and now, Here Endeth the Discussion :)

norman | April 26, 23:21 CET

"...it speaks to so many of us and so many of us can relate regardless of gender, sexual orientation, political beliefs and religious beliefs and even nationality."

That's because deep down we are all just fragile human beings clinging to planet Earth.

bloodflowers | April 26, 23:22 CET

Chris in Va. - well yes, of course, liberals eat a principal a day (ha ha). Seriously, my only point was: When the students ate principal Flutie, they were showing a disrespect for authority, and that this is one example of how the 'verse will often run counter to an expressed conservative value. It's neither liberal nor conservative to actually eat a principal.

if this posts with an [edit] thing besides my name, can someone please tell me how to post without it? would so appreciate it. thanks.

nyangel | April 26, 23:35 CET

It's meant to have an [edit] thing next to it, nyangel. It's so you can edit your post if need be. We all have that next to our own posts. :-)

cal | April 26, 23:39 CET

ah so. thanks cal. :)

nyangel | April 26, 23:43 CET

Not arguing the jokes about who is president (but that usually happens in a lot of series no matter who is in the White House) but the Dixie Chicks poster could be political or it could just be that Fred is a Texan.

Firefly Flanatic | April 27, 00:29 CET

So is Amy Acker. She went to my high school and lived in the same neighborhood I did, which is completely off topic, but a bit of trivia.

fate's bitch | April 27, 00:38 CET

I think that's neat trivia! Did you know her?

Firefly Flanatic | April 27, 01:03 CET

She's 4 years younger than I am so I was never actually in school with her, but always knew her name. My sister was in school with her, and my parents knew her parents. I keep telling my mom to run into them and find out if they know anything about Angel's future!

My mom tries to watch Angel and Buffy to be able to relate to me (which is very endearing and sweet), and she always says, "Amy is still SO SKINNY!"

fate's bitch | April 27, 01:08 CET

Wow such excellent posts--really enjoyed all that.

I'm a raging liberal and I gotta admit I've never seen anything really liberal on the show, outside a surface acceptance of alternative lifestyle.

On the contrary I think Joss is really more like a Royalist.

The characters are never in charge of their destinys. They make quite a point of it. Deux of the machine or some such.

"Youre chosen, you're special" Buffy told the Potentials. They were born like royalty--did not make a choice of their own. When Buffy made the call at the end, all she did was expand her prison to include others--she forced her will over the PIT'S.

Not a democracy. A military organization can't be and that was the active metaphor in 7. The burden of being King or Queen or whatever, you get it. I gotta admit it surprised me--am always hoping for a more liberal point of view.

Entitlement, being chosen, and anyone who makes a free will choice is severly punished. (Of course I'm talking about Spike) And to love is to use one's free will. To allow.

Last weeks Angel ep actually phrased 'free will choice' as a dirty word out of the mouth of a demon as an endorsement to kill Connor. And then the show took the position that Angel had done the right thing by overriding Connors choice in the matter. They could have still done the deal and he could have asked Connor first, but no, he choose to work from the perspective of being King and the super specialness that comes with that entitlement.

You can tell I wanted Connor to have vote in his life.

Are they saying Prophesy and being chosen has more power in the world than free will choice? This is the way BTVS was leaning and certainly the position Angel seems to be taking. Return the King is totally Republican. (in my opinion) It is his right to tell such a story--but never would I call diminishing free will choice in a world where massive mind control and slavery is a real concern; liberal.

We'll never know what Emma meant and that's how it should be. But we will always be fascinated by watching their lives because we are fascinated by the story within the story and all this to learn more. We are all here on this forum because we want to expand our minds.

I agree with an earlier post--I have seen posts that flame people with the intent of total annhiliation and it is disquieting in the extreme. But I think folks on this site are pretty open to a multi layered discussion. It's good.

Love JM, I love how his mind and spirit works but that doesn't make him perfect either. These actors are not a religon we hold only in the mind and then go to holy war over--just people we can learn from. I'm learning this.

So JM has his reasons and I'm sure he can joke because he is totaly over it. But I've got video tape of him making a 'choking' gesture while he talks about Sarah. (All joking--but the word 'comedy' means 'like life')

He has described her as a lovable pesky sister. And when asked who his favorite scene partner was--his response was...Landau.

Nothing againest Sarah, sure he was joking but he honestly stessed how different their approaches were. Juliet and he came from a similar background and so it was easier to work with her.

I guess my point was--if Sarah behaved that way with JM, no doubt she would with other actors. And I'll say it again--repsect for process AMONG ACTORS is considered the golden rule.
And it could have brought her a certain reputation.

That she didn't appear to back off and give him his space says something. It does.

As an actor you have all this energy flowing between you--you know when someone is hurting. You know when you're hurting someone, you get connected. It looks real because it is real. That's why respect is so important. You have to do and say things and then have lunch.

Maybe it was her way of dealing--but her way didn't appear to include his way. Now this doesn't make her a bad person and obviously has not interfered with them loving each other as people (I had this lovely dream two weeks ago where JM and SMG met unexpectedly and were so happy to see each other they had this wonderful hug. Strange but lovely dream)

Anyway,

JM can joke and does, but he is also honest, and I was wrong to call him passive agressive--I admit that was really too strong. I don't think he's that. He's too honest--I guess what I was trying to point out that everybody has something. Some subtext influcing what they say and how they behave and so seldom is anything pure from a private motive. Freud was right about that I think.

So by virtue of JM making these comments over and over again--there must have been an issue and JM had to be the one to bend and deal and it must have been harder for him because method acting is much more inflexable. If it was me and has been upon occasion--I would have given him his space and support. It's so easy to do.

Come on, you know when your jibe is cutting in the present and sure everything can be funny after the fact. I had a partial nude scene once and it was 'arty' with wonderful talented people who were so great it made it easier. I can laugh about it now. And it was a comedic scene in context of the film but still I don't know how I would have handled it if somebody 'mocked my sock'. It just makes it harder. That's all.

Putting yourself in someone eles's shoes always makes it easier and JM wouldn't be commenting on it if it hadn't bothered him once. He ADMITS that it bothered him. What did he say--something like: you hope, you count on your fellow actors for support,especially in a nude scene and there she is giggling; you've got a sock, you're wearing a sock!

Alright. I'll admit it's funny.

And the audiance was laughing, but it still bothered him when it happened. And actors count on respect from cast and crew in order to get through and he wasn't getting it.

This is what I'm saying:

It speaks to a state of mind in her development that she was so oblivios and maybe that is the state of mind that has bought her a little rep.

Now you can call him wrong for letting it bother him--but you get in there and get naked either physically or emotionally (which is harder, ah me!) and then let's talk

But yeah, I think Emma's politics comment was referring to something else, something private--my mind just couldn't help leaping to: Was it Sarah?

Sad slippery mind.

BforBeth | April 27, 01:08 CET

It's interesting how one vague comment can spark such great discussion. :)

I took her comment to mean something that has to do with the business aspect of the show.

Silent Night | April 27, 01:35 CET

All things return to SMG. Again and again and again. This debate about her will never end, will it? Sometimes I really wish it would.

Simon | April 27, 01:37 CET

And all from one poster making wild assumptions about what would *probably* be the result of Emma's comments. Was that really necessary?

Caroline | April 27, 01:47 CET

"Stop the (SMG) Insanity!"
-Susan Powter

splay | April 27, 01:57 CET

i think if JM said it was all in good fun, then thats what it was.

norman | April 27, 02:49 CET

I'm a raging liberal and I gotta admit I've never seen anything really liberal on the show, outside a surface acceptance of alternative lifestyle.

Hey isa, there is an essay in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Philosophy: Fear and Trembling in Sunnydale that your comments reminded me of--"Brownskirts: Fascism, Christianity, and the Eternal Demon" by Neal King. I don't know if you've read it. It was one of the better essays in the book. The author is a very avid fan but contends that the show is nonetheless the antithesis of left-wing politics. I don't necessarily agree but he really makes a nearly airtight case. If you haven't read it you might enjoy it.

marmoset | April 27, 03:54 CET

I have that book, Stakeholder, but haven't yet read that essay...will make amends soon.

But I think you illustrate something that blwessels (I think, it was about 40 postings or so ago!) mentioned: that the reason for the astounding range of interest in Buffy owes not to any ideological intent on the part of the creator(s), but rather to the brilliance of the storytelling.

Because, after all it is...a story...a beautiful, wonderful, magical story...

Chris inVirginia | April 27, 04:59 CET

I have read all 50+ post here and have enjoyed the discussion more then the article it was based on. I guess that is the reason that Whedonesque is such a great site. One thing about SMG is that I don't think that I have heard her be negative about the role of Buffy. Instead her problem seemed to have been with the time demands that the show required. So I am not surprised to have her be open to a movie that wouldn't have the same demands as a weekly series.

pesoto74 | April 27, 06:45 CET

Wow, so now we're fiercely defending Sarah when no one is attacking her? I'm sorry, I just don't know who I understand less.

The "I hate this actor/actress, even though I never met them and every bit of info about them confirms they're evil!" -crowd...

Or the "This actor/actress portrays my favorite character and is therefore a saint who is absoultely above and beyond reproach and incapable of having less nice character traits like every other human being has."-crowd. Because really, they're both about equally ridiculous.

As for Emma's remarks, I actually didn't know what to make of them. I thought for a second that she meant politics in the sense of being pretty much the only arch-conservative in there, but then that didn't seem to ring true. Money issues aren't usually referred to that way either...I don't know. It could be she didn't get along with someone and it could be Sarah. And if it was so what? Not everyone gets along with everyone else. Ever been to an average office?

And Joss and his crew are very much 'liberals' and it shows in their work. (Joss is a feminist, pro-gay rights, question-authority atheist. So yeah, that would be liberal by most standards) But to their credit, they made stories that are so morally sound that many people of many different beliefs and convictions find themselves agreeing with the themes and 'morals'. Always the mark of good art if you ask me.

However I think you'll also find most of it's audience would be progressive/democrat/liberal if you check. And much of the show dealt with things (such as the gay issues and metaphors) that many american conservatives would roar against. That there are conservatives who don't proves the point of my previous paragraph but overall I'd say this is a liberal show in how as much I even want to use simplistic labels like that.

And I generally don't.

EdDantes | April 27, 08:19 CET

Caroline - "And all from one poster making wild assumptions about what would *probably* be the result of Emma's comments. Was that really necessary?"

Whilst i would take issue with the "wild" part of your comment (what i suggested is hardly out of the question or even unlikely now is it?) i agree it was certainly just an assumption.

However the debate that followed said assumption, that could easily have been ignored if the other posters had wished, goes a long way to proving my point. Thankfully the members of this board seem to be a very enlightened, open minded bunch who can see that every story has two sides but had i made this comment on one of the many other forums i like to check out the balance of arguement would not have been so level.

As for necessary, is anything we discuss here actually necessary? Not really, but it is always interesting nevertheless.

Kaine | April 27, 13:55 CET

"However the debate that followed said assumption, that could easily have been ignored if the other posters had wished, goes a long way to proving my point."

Kind of hard to ignore since you repeated that point several times over throughout the thread. And the only thing it 'proved' was that it seems you were actually looking for a fight.

EdDantes | April 28, 21:38 CET

Looking for a fight? No.

Looking for a reaction? Always!

A lot of what i do is based upon studying how people react given certain stimuli and this point, as it turned out, was a very good proving ground for this posting board.

As i said, interesting.

Kaine | April 29, 03:23 CET